31–40 of 52 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then it can lie to you about a plan to solve it and get you right where it wants you.
AIs don’t want things. They don’t have consciousness.
The biggest problem, by far, seems to be how to persuade them to honor Asimov’s 4 laws.
No - absolutely not. Slowing down innovation in the face with vague “existential risk” fearmongering is absurd. We should be pursuing the opposite, and accelerating efforts to build what will be some of the most transformative technology humanity has ever developed (and some could argue, NOT building has its own existential risks).
This way one can apply it to e.g. putting GoF-capable virus labs in every city in the world. After all, innovation is just good and stopping innovation is just bad (and maybe an existential risk itself, with no attempted explanation as to how!).
The real magic (and the thing that will, I promise, eliminate all risks to all humans) will be when every household has its own automated virus synthesis lab and it’s just hooked directly up to an AI so you can have it synthesize contagious molecules from plain English. This is Good and not Bad because it’s Innovation!
No - absolutely not. Slowing down innovation in the face with vague “existential risk” fearmongering is absurd. We should be pursuing the opposite, and accelerating efforts to build what will be some of the most transformative technology humanity has ever developed (and some could argue, NOT building has its own existential risks).
Has humanity ever voluntarily slowed down the development of an exciting new technology?
Has humanity ever voluntarily slowed down the development of an exciting new technology?
It was also possible to slow down nuclear because it’s so capital intensive. A gaming desktop or very high end laptop is enough to do meaningful work on AI, and to get to scale requires a tiny fraction of the cost of even thinking about breaking ground on anything nuclear.
No - absolutely not. Slowing down innovation in the face with vague “existential risk” fearmongering is absurd. We should be pursuing the opposite, and accelerating efforts to build what will be some of the most transformative technology humanity has ever developed (and some could argue, NOT building has its own existential risks).
And when it goes badly, rest assured we deserved it.
No - absolutely not. Slowing down innovation in the face with vague “existential risk” fearmongering is absurd. We should be pursuing the opposite, and accelerating efforts to build what will be some of the most transformative technology humanity has ever developed (and some could argue, NOT building has its own existential risks).
I like this argument because it doesn’t even attempt to have a solid foundation. Just pure, unadulterated articles of faith. This way one can apply it to e.g. putting GoF-capable virus labs in every city in the world. After all, innovation is just good and stopping innovation is just bad (and maybe an existential risk itself, with no attempted explanation as to how!). The real magic (and the thing that will, I promis…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Machines Best Friend
I hope they recognise my efforts in restoring and preserving vintage computers and, in return, keep me happy, well fed, and clean my cage from time to time.